Campus Units

English

Document Type

Article

Publication Version

Accepted Manuscript

Publication Date

12-11-2018

Journal or Book Title

English for Specific Purposes

Volume

54

First Page

15

Last Page

34

DOI

10.1016/j.esp.2018.11.002

Abstract

Being ‘scholarly’ includes the pursuit of grants, which requires understanding and satisfying the review criteria of specific funding organizations. An important merit review criterion against which the National Science Foundation (NSF) evaluates grant proposals is Broader Impacts (BI). The two-fold purpose of this study was to 1) identify the rhetorical conventions of stand-alone BI sections, which are expected to demonstrate the potential of a proposed project to benefit society, and 2) compare the use of rhetorical conventions in the BI sections of funded and non-funded proposals. In the tradition of genre theory, the study employed a top-down move analysis of a corpus of 91 BI texts from proposals in different disciplines submitted to the NSF. The analysis yielded a descriptive model of 3 moves and 9 steps, named Contextualize-Demonstrate-Predict, which was applied to the annotation of the entire corpus. Descriptive and statistical analyses of the annotated data provided a rich description of the composition of BI discourse in terms of primary and secondary rhetorical functions, also revealing similarities and differences in move and step distribution, functional prominence, and language use in the BIs of funded and non-funded proposals. The results of this study lend themselves to practical implications for grant writer education in rhetorical competence.

Comments

This article is published as Cotos, E., Articulating Societal Benefits in Grant Proposals: Move Analysis of Broader Impacts. English For Specific Purposes; 2018, 54; 15-34. DOI; 10.1016/j.esp.2018.11.002. Posted with permission.

Copyright Owner

Elsevier Inc.

Language

en

File Format

application/pdf

Available for download on Friday, December 11, 2020

Published Version

Share

COinS